> Now, as I understand it, sendfile() will perform zero-copy IO; since the
> contents
> of the file will undoubtedly be in the page cache, it should in theory DMA the
> data straight from the (single copy of the) data in RAM to the NIC buffers.
>
> It should also handle refcounting for you - you
> For what it's worth, real IP multicast is quite commonly used for distributing
> short messages to many clients in realtime in some closed networks, such as
> financial trading systems. With good network equipment that can handle low-
> or zero-loss timely delivery, it does work very well.
Empha
> Not to mention the fact that inevitably, you probably are going to want some
> security on those connections, which means TLS, which means individual crypto
> connections.
If there is a need for encryption, then yes, .. but it's not always needed
>
> I believe the best model for this kind of h
On 02/10/2012 08:20 PM, Tobias Oberstein wrote:
>
>> store the socket buffer as a (fairly complex) linked list of
>> reference-counted
>> blocks, and use scatter-gather IO to the network card.
>
> Doesn't a (modern) kernel do something like that for virtual memory pages ie.?
Possibly. My knowledg
On 02/10/2012 09:54 PM, Glyph Lefkowitz wrote:
> I believe the best model for this kind of high-volume
> reliable-multicast-over-unicast is a spanning tree, like what IRC
For what it's worth, real IP multicast is quite commonly used for
distributing short messages to many clients in realtime in
On Feb 10, 2012, at 12:49 PM, Phil Mayers wrote:
> On 10/02/12 16:56, Tobias Oberstein wrote:
>> Hi there,
>>
>> what is the most efficient/performant way of doing the following?
>>
>> I have a short message prepared .. say a string of 100 octets.
>> I want to push out that _same_ string on 100
> > what is the most efficient/performant way of doing the following?
> >
> > I have a short message prepared .. say a string of 100 octets.
> > I want to push out that _same_ string on 100k connected TCPs (on a server).
> >
> > ==
> >
> > My thinking was: ideally, the 100 bytes would be transferre
On 10/02/12 16:56, Tobias Oberstein wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> what is the most efficient/performant way of doing the following?
>
> I have a short message prepared .. say a string of 100 octets.
> I want to push out that _same_ string on 100k connected TCPs (on a server).
>
> ==
>
> My thinking was: i
AFAIK that's not possible in TCP, only in multicast, and the kernel
will make copies of that string no matter what, but I am highly
unknowledgeable in this area.
On 2/10/12, Tobias Oberstein wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> what is the most efficient/performant way of doing the following?
>
> I have a shor
Hi there,
what is the most efficient/performant way of doing the following?
I have a short message prepared .. say a string of 100 octets.
I want to push out that _same_ string on 100k connected TCPs (on a server).
==
My thinking was: ideally, the 100 bytes would be transferred to kernel/NIC sp
10 matches
Mail list logo
